Selling Selling and Florida Politics

by: Tally

Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 12:55:01 PM EDT

He also provided reasons why Democrats keep insisting on using what he calls Policy-Speak, even though it continues to fail politically in achieving either campaign or governing goals.

Unfortunately, probably because he's an academic rather than a businessman, Lakoff has not done an adequate job, using his own methods, of selling selling to Democrats.

Jon Stewart made the same point more effectively with his comedy riff on "Why Can't You Guys Stay on Message?"

So, what's this got to do with Florida?

We have five statewide elections up for grabs (with no incumbent) in 2010, US Senate, Governor, Attorney General, Chief Financial Officer, and Commissioner of Agriculture. For a Democrat to win any of these in this large, ten media market state, he or she MUST approach his/her campaign from a marketing standpoint.

As I've already written about, Adelaide "Alex" Sink, our present CFO, will succeed in her race for Governor because, as a former businesswoman, she GETS marketing.

But what about the other candidates?

At present, there isn't even a competitive Democratic candidate for Chief Financial Officer. This probably doesn't matter, since the necessity of a two year campaign cycle is highly questionable. I'm still hoping that after the new year, Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio will change her mind and jump in.

The point, though, is whether the Democratic candidates for these positions fashion a campaign that adequately embraces marketing techniques.

Let me give a clear example of what I'm talking about.

I've written in the past about the disastrous campaign to defeat the anti-gay marriage amendment during the last election cycle here in Florida. Here's an example, promulgated by the Unitarian Universalist Association's Standing On the Side of Love Campaign, of what should have been done.

Instead, Florida Red and Blue, the ad-hoc organization set up to campaign for the amendment's defeat, insisted on soft-pedaling the gay issue and appealing to reason. When reporter Adam Smith asked Derek Newton, a leader of the organization, about whether this was a mistake, especially when compared to how Harvey Milk defeated a state wide initiative against gays in California, this is how he responded.

He dismisses Harvey Milk as only working in San Francisco, (not true), says that Florida is a large, diverse state, (so is California), and then blames the voters for the defeat of the campaign.

That's right, it was the VOTERS' fault!

As long as we let political consultant's continue to get away with this nonsense, there will never be any accountability in political campaigning. (Newton is an alumnus of the Kerry campaign. I'm glad he wasn't in charge of Obama's campaign in Florida).

Can you imagine an ad executive trying to use this excuse? So why don't more Democrats get this?

It goes back to the 60s era book The Selling of the President and the association of marketing techniques in politics to proganda machines used by dictatorial governments to maintain control.

But the point being missed is that it is just as possible to effectively market The Truth as it is to market lies. And, more importantly, when we have opposition marketing lies or acting as demagogues, then it is IMPERATIVE that we market positive values that support our campaigns and governing goals just as strongly.

That's the direction I'm headed in over the next year. Hope you are too.